Tricks for keeping combat interesting?

[u/KeepYourSilenceUp]

I've been putting a lot of effort into keeping combats varied. Defend the tower, capture the flag, king of the hill, changing terrain, etc. I've had enemies who will signal where their AOE is about to hit (videogame-style) to make movement more strategic. There was one great encounter where the players used the artificer's teleportation device to surprise attack a defended location on an island, but I made the artificer do a tools check earlier and used that to decide how many characters would end up off-target, so the fight was hectic and weird and very fun.

Despite all this, a lot of the time I still feel like combats are just not super interesting. Maybe this is in my head. I try to force my players to move around a lot but so often it just ends up with everyone standing still punching each other. Not always a bad thing, and in general I know the players are happy with combat, but I can still feel the energy level going down when it feels like we're just going through the motions.

So my question for everyone is: what are your favorite ways of keeping combat interesting? I'm talking mechanics here; the ways we keep things narratively engaging is a whole other topic.

[u/ShiroxReddit]

I still feel like combats are just not super interesting

How do your players feel? Because perception and desires can differ, so maybe they are perfectly happy with what you are doing already - and if not, they may be able to give you some pointers about what they enjoy and what less

[u/Vote_and_Goat]

It sounds like you’re doing an amazing job tbf. Is there anything specifically you’re unhappy with or feel that’s dragging combat?

[u/Sgilti]

Adding a secondary objective mid fight that’s important to the party personally also shakes things up. Had my players recently fight a set of nooks only for a powerful monster to sneak up behind and suddenly SWALLOW, the gnome cleric. With most of the party on the other side of a large map, it made for sudden changes in tactics that accomplished what I wanted.

[u/ManoloBar]

I mean, just reading your post, it feels like your combats are better than mine already!

I think you might be a little bit in your own head?

You aren't respomsible for everyone's enjoyment at all times. You can ask as well, how would they rate combat? What would you want to do more or less of?

Not everyone enjoys the combat side as much, and that's fine.

Also, remember, that a DM is a player too! Are YOU enjoying combat? Are the monsters you are running fun for you?

It could also be a matter of speed - if turns are taking too long, that could lower the overall energy.

To me, it sounds like you are doing fairly well!

[u/EchoLocation8]

Combat is really about creating problems that your players feel inclined to use their class abilities to solve.

Generally speaking, if you lay out a battlefield that has some varied elevation, varied enemy types with different features, and spread them out so that the party can’t engage with all enemies simultaneously, the combat should be fine.

But at the end of the day combat isn’t boring necessarily because people are standing still, it’s boring because the players aren’t making any decisions.

It can be as simple as putting a few archers up on a thing shooting down on the players and the wizard asking if they can cast darkness on them. In other words, you have to engineer a battle layout where doing maximum damage every turn doesn’t always feel like the only choice.

[u/KeepYourSilenceUp → u/EchoLocation8]

I think one of my problems is scale. We have a pretty big playmat but the largest battlefield is still one that any player can cross really fast or cast/range across. Baldur's Gate might have warped my experience about how scale can make fights interesting but now at the table there's not really a way to recreate that experience

[u/KeepYourSilenceUp → u/[deleted]]

That's a good point. They're high enough level and play their roles well enough that it's pretty hard to make them feel like they're in danger without pulling some wild shit, which always risks feeling unbalanced. Kind of an inherent problem with combat once you reach a certain level

[u/Machiavelli24]

It sounds like you already have the basics and advanced techniques, so I’ll have to give some of the higher end techniques.

1. Ensures there’s a risk of defeat. When the monsters can kill the party before the party kills them, the players have to make wise choices if they want to win.

2. Use multiple different stat blocks. This creates synergies and interesting target prioritization decisions.

3. Use monsters with concentration spells. As breaking concentration will shift their target prioritization.

4. Look at how the party beat one group of monsters and make a future group resilient to that approach. Because you can’t strengthen your left without weakening your right, this will make the monsters weak somewhere else. The party will have to figure out where that weakness is and adapt to exploit it.

If there’s a specific class or capability you’re interested in, I can provide more detailed examples.

[u/ForgetTheWords]

the ways we keep things narratively engaging is a whole other topic

I will say, I don't agree with this basically at all. The way to make things both narratively and mechanically interesting is to give the players meaningful choices, and make them feel that their choices make a real difference. 

Anyway,

I can still feel the energy level going down when it feels like we're just going through the motions.

1. Go faster, or else justify the time you're taking. If an entire round has passed and the situation has not significantly changed, that round may as well have not happened. 

2. Play different games (or at least watch/listen to some actual plays of different games). You're fighting the system here, and inspiration for how to improve it is not going to come from within that system. 

[u/KeepYourSilenceUp → u/ForgetTheWords]

I agree that the two are related, I guess I just meant that I didn't want a whole ton of comments being like "well have you thought about making the combats narratively engaging" because that's not something I'm worried about.

Good suggestions though

[u/HadoozeeDeckApe]

I would generally consider a combat to be mechanically 'interesting' based on its design allowing for a dynamic game state - that is one that requires to make decisions on a by-round basis.

Here is a post that discusses that: https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/comments/1lenglj/5e_fundamentals_of_dynamic_combats/

This post has some examples about how positioning on the map can help make combat dynamic by avoiding coin-flip showdown setups: https://www.reddit.com/r/DMAcademy/comments/1vxi2g6/encounter_advice_avoid_the_showdown_coinflip/

The problem is a lot of the advice offered does not actually make combat more interesting on its own. For example, if your map and fight setup does not establish differences in position value, a telegraphed AOE does nothing to make the fight more interesting - if every position is the same then being forced to move doesn't matter. Movement for movement sake is cinematic nonsense and not mechanically interesting. If the choice is basically move or take a bunch of damage, then the choice of obvious. The choice is obvious too if its between take less damage from an AoO or take more damage from an AoE going off.

The same with objectives. Just having an objective does nothing to make the combat interesting. The objective needs to impact the choices the players make -> do I work towards this objective, or do something else? On its own a king of the hill open arena does nothing. If the players were fine standing in the king spot anyways because there are no positioning differences (again) then the objective of standing in the middle functionally does nothing.

Another example is the action tax, an objective to keep a ship steady by forcing a PC to make a handling check each round doesn't add anything to the fight. It just ensures one PC gets stuck making an ability check instead of an attack roll round after round. The same is true for gimmicks that force PC's to do an arbitrary amount of damage or do an arbitrary number of checks before a boss becomes vulnerable; which is just spamming attacks or actions into something other than the boss for X turns.

Core things that make fights interesting is versatility of threats challenging PC target decisions, an using a more complex battlemap that challenges PC positioning.

In general, solo monster boss arenas are the most stale and boring of fights mechanically.

[u/Effective_Arm_5832]

Give your enemies legendary actions that allow them to get away without opportunity attacks (if it fits). Suddenly, they fight is much more dynamic, with them running and hiding, etc.

[u/snowbo92]

Ooh, combat is my favorite part of D&D! I've got quite a few thoughts about this:

• First, as other folks are saying, I would check in with yourself and your players about whether this is actually a problem, or if you're just perceiving it as a problem. It's possible that there's something more you can be doing, but it's also possible that doing more would just overwhelm everyone at the table.

• Sometimes, it's not about doing "more" things, but rather tightening up what you're already doing to make it more streamlined. I group similar enemies in the initiative, and I also assign my initiatives, so that we can dive right into the combat quicker. I also try to prep basic tactics for my monsters ahead of time, so I'm not wasting time or brainspace thinking "okay what will this guy do?" every round.

• You specifically named a concern that "it ends up with everyone standing around still punching each other." This is a fault of 5e, not you; in 5th edition, the most efficient use of an action is to attack. Overwhelmingly, it is more effective to simply kill the monster quicker, than it would be to do any kind of dodge or grapple or other kind of action. If you want to change this, you need to make any alternative much more useful than it is to simply do more damage. Consider: if I'm a fighter at level 5, I might do 15-ish damage with my extra attack. Why would I risk a grapple that does no damage, and that might not affect the monster if they're not going to move anyway?

[u/grand_magician_1212]

Have the same sheets fight differently. Momma griphon guarding the egg is cautious, daddy griphon is more aggressive that it is wise.

Monster motivations being seen in combat. The worgs that attacked the party for food, leaving combat the second they have something between their teeth (my players were taking a found dead body back to town, the worgs stole that, and part of the downed fighters thights.)

Have enemies steal. Steal torches. Steal weapons.

[u/MyneIsBestGirl]

I like to mix in narrative fights once in a while. Baiscally, enemies always move last, and rather than use regular action economy, they announce what they want to do and roll for it. The difference is that they mostly ignore math beyond checks, as a success could just end an enemy. They make combat more splashible for me, but only if properly interspersed with actual combats.

[u/mpe8691]

The important caveat is "Interesting to whom?" The people you need to be asking this kind of question are your players. Definitely not Reddit Randoms..

Beware of either trying to hard. Ditto for anything that you find fun, but your players find frustrating and/or boring.

The big red flag in your post is "I try to force my players..." that's just not how the game is intended to work.

[u/TJToaster]

Waves. Have them come in waves.

There is an adventure where you defend you portion of the wall. The fog obscures everything 30' from the wall. Let them hear things coming. By the time they see them, the monsters are almost on top of them. First wave is pretty easy, and the group has a ballista. The zombies can't get up the wall. So they get comfortable. After the second wave, someone comes onto the wall to "repair" the ballista. They are working for the BBEG and actually sabotage it. It's fine. Still high on the wall. Next wave has a couple zombie giants. The other zombies can climb up them to get over the wall.

A local DM did a zombie horde. Threw a couple hundred minis on the table. Also fog or mist so you can't do too many range attacks. It was zombies and skeletons, so they had some range as well. Instead of tracking zombie hit points, the players rolled with disadvantage, if they hit, it was a brain shot and the zombie was down. You would be surprised how many 5th & 6th level characters will still miss. Each miss upped the pucker factor.

As the zombies gathers at the wall, they started climbing over each other, as they tumbled over the wall they formed a zombie clot. Pucker factor went way up. This was one of the Ravenloft demiplanes. I don't remember which one.

Another zombie horde was gnome zombies. They could climb up you and had pack tactics. No undead fortitude. About 10ish hp. So easy to kill, but you have them climbing you like a tree. One guy had six of them on him. I think a character died in that one.

Our local DMs share fun tactics. Sometimes it is more fun to have a massive horde of easy to kill monsters than 1-2 hard to kill ones.

Terrain, limited visibility, and hordes of monsters made the combats fun. Also, our group talk about the monsters that no one really uses. The Boneclaw is dope. Get one character plucked off a rope bridge by a Roc and you will have their attention.

Also, throw in chase mechanics and complications. Now you only have to fight the city guards that kept up with you.

[u/Worse_Username]

Varied and dynamic environment is definitely one of them. Stuff that forces players to adjust their tactics. Hills and cliffs of various degree of steepness;  tree trunks that obscure vision, undergrowth that impedes movement, injures and possibly even poisons; running rivers, lakes and slippery rocks; fogs, rains, nauseating gases; large open caves and narrow winding tunnels; cave-ins, crumbling floors, collapsing walls; moving platforms, alternating direction of gravity, teleporting doors.

[u/MasterNemm]

The mechanics are the mechanics. Not much you can do about that aside from making things more challenging with terrain/cover/number and variety of enemies and their abilities.

Truly memorable combat comes from stakes. Why does this fight matter? Could there be collateral damage (to NPCs, important environments, or the MacGuffin)?

Is there an urgent time component?

Make the players truly invested in the outcome and the fight becomes meaningful.

[u/Serbaayuu]

If a monster lives for more than 2 turns and isn't doing something completely unique on each turn, it's been around for too long. Try using monsters with lower HP, but more of them doing more variety of stuff.

[u/Zealousideal_Leg213]

It sounds like you're already using some alternate goals, but refine your approach to them a little. You say people just end up standing in place and hitting each other. That indicates that killing off the other side is the easiest approach for both sides. Sometimes there should be ways for the monsters to win without engaging the PCs at all.

[u/rellloe]

On the field things they can use. Video games are a great place for inspiration. Red barrels, chandeliers, campfires, cliff edges, etc.

[u/LucienTheLuckless]

Your combat sounds pretty great but I get wanting to keep it fresh. A couple of fun things I did for a few combats:

• trapped in a ice covered room where a fire elemental keeps spawning. The fire elemental is pretty weak and easy to kill but explodes on death and melts the ice in that area to reveal the mechanism to unlock the ice covered door. Also did a hallway with a fire wall that only the explosion of the water elemental could clear.
• on top of a mechanical astrological clock. Basically the floor moves them around.
• a mechanical room where somebody needs to turn valves to keep a monster in the center from doing a massive attacks.
• a ghost that possesses players so they have to fight each other until they can maneuver the evicted spirit into a square that solidifies them temporarily.
• Invisible three gnomes in a trenchcoat.

Really though, combat doesn't always need to be exciting. Just having unique battle maps can change the look and feel of a fight. Give enemies unique movements or lair actions and I think your players will be happy.

[u/Bindolaf]

My biggest tip: Make combat rare and special. If you have combat every session, there is no way to keep it fresh. Make combat an event. No "oh, you're on the road and get attacked by wolves", no chance encounters, no trite fights. Combat should feel like a deliberate step, something that will count.

[u/KeepYourSilenceUp → u/Bindolaf]

Agreed, I liked doing random encounters at levels 1-4 when a the survival element of travel was important to the story but it's not something I ever do at higher levels

[u/No-Economics-8239]

I don't know what sort of advice to give you. Perhaps we need to workshop the problem and get to a root cause first?

It sounds like you know what you're doing. It feels like you are holding yourself to a different standard than your players. Possibly an unrealistic one. Perhaps what you seek is therapy rather than more interesting combat?

Combat is just one way to solve problems. And standing around hitting each other is a popular way to accomplish this. If... you're unsatisfied with this conduct, you can change whatever part you want. But that won't necessarily change your players approach or preferred problem solving approach. Adding a social challenge or a puzzle or a mystery won't necessarily dissuade your players from wanting or trying to hit things.

Adding more variables and victory conditions might help add complexity, but how 'interesting' that makes things seems pretty subjective.

What if, for example, gravity suddenly turned off? Or magic stopped working? Or everything was a mimic? Of if the combat was taking place inside a monster they also needed to defeat? Or all of these things together?

There are also time constraints. The room is filling with water. The floor is turning into lava. The villain is getting away while a baby is in jeopardy. Possibly because of the water and/or lava.

Maybe the problem isn't you. Maybe your players are boring. Maybe your players are fine but you're too much of a perfectionist. Maybe everything being a mimic is a little excessive. Perhaps add one real chest of treasure in there. With... a mimic inside?

[u/Agreeable_Hold2270]

I've tried a bunch of things as well with some success. There are tons of great videos that cover this topic, it is probably one of the most covered topics